• Sentient Loom
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -108 months ago

    a small measure of good

    There was no measure of good whatsoever. Her situation was made objectively worse, and we’re presuming to praise those responsible merely for not making it even more worse. I’m not the one who created any doom or gloom. I didn’t kick her out. And it’s not cynical to sympathize with the homeless woman instead of with the people who kicked her out. Mate.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      18 months ago

      So you’re saying it would have been better for her if she was charged with crimes? She would be stuck with fines and probably jail time. You do realize SHE was breaking multiple laws by being there right? So yeah, it is a small measure of good because they looked the other way rather than filing charges.

      • Sentient Loom
        link
        fedilink
        English
        38 months ago

        They didn’t look the other way. They kicked her out. And I don’t blame them. But neither do I praise them or call them good.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          08 months ago

          Ok, so in your eyes it’s the same as if they pressed charges? Which they absolutely could have done since she was stealing power from them for over a year and trespassing.

          • @Malfeasant
            link
            28 months ago

            “Not worse” is different from “better”, how is this a difficult concept?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              08 months ago

              Not going to jail and paying fines is better than going to jail and paying fines. What part are you struggling with?

              • LustyArgonian
                link
                English
                18 months ago

                How about the definition of “cruelty”? The law itself is unjust. It’s bananas to me that someone can be criminalized for seeking shelter in good faith. She wasn’t destroying that area or stealing (except some electricity). She needed shelter. I learned in kindergarten that we need food, water, and shelter. Didn’t you learn those as needs? If not, maybe you really are the ignorant one.

                It’s not “kind” to simply not enforce a cruel law. It’s just not being as cruel as they could be. Just because they could’ve abused their power more and didn’t, doesn’t make them good. It just makes them less shit.

                My work had people squatting under the awnings at at night. We let them as long as they didn’t make a mess and left while we were open. I gave them coffee sometimes. They could have just ignored the situation or told her she couldn’t have the extension cord. Like genuinely, as a real human to human interaction, that’s what they should’ve done.

                If she’d been a squirrel or some pigeons, they would’ve probably left her alone. Because we can understand that animals need shelter.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  17 months ago

                  Did you know there are programs and help for people like her? A place where she can stay safely. A place where she’s not ON A ROOF LIVING IN A SIGN which is certainly unsafe and if she were to get hurt, guess who’s on the hook for that? Yeah, the business. Cruel would be putting her ass in jail and fining her.

                  • LustyArgonian
                    link
                    English
                    07 months ago

                    People always say “there’s a program,” but actually kook in her city for programs - what are they? Are they shelters? Or real housing? We usually DON’T have those programs, which is why people end up living behind signs

    • LustyArgonian
      link
      English
      18 months ago

      And she’s also a homeless woman. Women need private spaces when they are homeless, they can’t just be on the street as safely as men are. They space was probably VERY safe for her compared to a shelter.